The field of the disclosure is resource tracking and more specifically systems and methods for identifying available resources including, among other things, space, people and equipment associated with an enterprise and obtaining access to those resources.
The present disclosure also relates generally to network-based systems for electronic collaboration sessions with at least some conferees participating from remote locations and more specifically to a system that enables a session to be initiated or scheduled and populated with content using software tools that are already familiar to most computer and communication network users.
The disclosure also describes a system that enables conferees associated with a session to add documents and files to a session queue at any time after a session is instantiated so that the queue provides a persistent repository for content related to the session that can be accessed at any time by one, a subset or all conferees associated with the session. The content including documents or files can be obtained from any digital source. Any conferee can invite any other person to associate with a session after which the invitee has full session privileges in at least some embodiments. The disclosed system, in at least some embodiments, enables conferees to control shared content during a conference in an egalitarian fashion where any conferee can open any content from the queue to share at any time and where each conferee also has the ability to independently view any document in a private window along side a sharing window.
Conferences and meetings have evolved from gatherings or sessions in conference rooms where participants met in person in the same physical location to electronic collaboration sessions where conferees can attend and substantially fully participate in sessions electronically or “on line” from remote locations. To this end, tools have been developed that enable remote conferees to appear via audio and/or video to other conferees and to view and hear other conferees via video and audio, respectively. Tools have also been developed that enable remote conferees to share content such as documents, images, video clips, application output, web sites, etc., with other conference attendees.
One now ubiquitous content sharing tool is electronic mail commonly referred to as E-mail. As well known to almost all computer users, E-mail enables users to transmit and memorialize communications between two or more persons and also to share content (e.g., documents, images, video clips, etc.) via attachment to E-mail messages. Essentially all E-mail programs have similar features (e.g., fields, tool bars, etc.) that computer users are extremely familiar with. Familiarity with E-mail has resulted in widespread use.
While on line collaboration and communication sessions have proven very useful, known collaboration tools have several shortcomings. First, known collaboration tools often require several steps in order to set up and manage a session. For instance, assume a session initiator intends to invite seven other conferees to a session at 8 AM on Tuesday and that the session initiator, while thinking about the session, decides that the initiator wants to refer to several different sets of content during the session including two word processor documents, a video clip and two spreadsheets showing sales figures for a prior quarter and a current quarter business cycle. Here, in order to set up the session, in many cases a session initiator has to use scheduling software to schedule the session and send invitations to the seven other conferees to be invited to the session. In addition, the initiator will likely have to select and send each of the five sets of content to be delivered to the other session conferees prior to the session so that the other conferees can access that information during the session. Hereinafter, unless indicated otherwise, a content set will be referred to as a file or a record. To expedite access by other conferees the initiator may attach all five files to be shared to a single E-mail to be transmitted to the other conferees. Upon receiving the scheduling notice, each of the seven conferees needs to open the notice and accept the session to be scheduled on their calendars.
Now assume that two days after initially scheduling the Tuesday 8 AM session, the initiator identifies two other files (e.g., another word processor document and a drawing generated via a drawing application) that the initiator intends to share with others during the session. Here, the initiator may attach the other two files to another E-mail, reselect the seven other conferees and send the other files to the other conferees.
Assume that one day before the session is to commence, the conference initiator determines that one of the original five files should be swapped out and replaced by another file (e.g., perhaps a new version of the file being swapped out). Here, the initiator may send yet another E-mail to the invitees including the new file and, perhaps, a note that one of the original files should be ignored.
Also, assume that upon receiving the invite to the Tuesday 8 AM session, a first and a second of the other conferees each identifies other files that they would like to share during the session. Here, each of the first and second other conferees may attach additional files to E-mails to the other conferees and send their files with a note indicating a desire to share the files.
Next assume that two of the seven conferees invited are not available for the session. Here, the initiator may invite two other substitute conferees to the session (e.g., proxies for the two originally invited conferees that cannot attend). In this case, the initiator would also have to forward files to be shared to each of the two proxies. In addition, each other conferee that intends to share files would also have to forward files to the two proxies.
Once a session starts, all conferees connect to the session for sharing. Here, connection often requires each conferee to call into a session for audio and/or video communication. In at least some cases, during a session, each conferee is required to access shared files separately by opening E-mail attachments as other conferees refer to different files. Here, where multiple conferees shared files in different E-mails, keeping all conferees “on the same page” can be a burdensome task at best as conferees have to independently access the previously sent E-mails, access specific files currently being discussed in an accessed E-mail and then switch between files and among pages or portions of specific files as other files and sections of files are referenced.
To reduce the complexities associated with scheduling a session and synchronizing shared content during a session, systems have been developed that enable conferees to simultaneously view content shared by other conferees. For instance, web-based conferencing software has been developed whereby conferees can share files, applications, etc., by sharing output presented on display screens of their personal computing devices (e.g., desktop computers, laptop computers, tablet type computers, smart phone or personal digital assistant type computers, etc.). Here, in addition to creating an audio and/or video link between conferees, an internet or other network link is created for sharing the content where all conferees link to a session run by a server.
Some web-based systems enable a conference initiator to earmark files including documents and other content to be shared in a session so that the files can easily be accessed by the initiator during a session. For instance, where an initiator intends to share seven files, each of the seven files can be linked to the session for access by the initiator. Where an invited conferee intends to share two files, the conferee can access those files during the session period and share the files with other conferees.
While web-based systems solve some of the problems associated with prior systems, they still have several shortcomings. For instance, to initiate a session, many known systems require a conferee to pre-register with a session server to create a system account. This process often requires entry of personal information as well as a process to establish some type of linkage to a user's electronically stored contact list(s), a process to establish a link to files controlled by the conferee, and requires at least some time commitment by the conferee to enter the information and for the server to set up the account.
As another instance, after an account has been set up, to initiate a session, a conferee needs to access a system software interface (e.g., a browser page) that, in many cases, is completely unfamiliar to the conferee. Here, while effort has been made to make initiation interfaces simple and intuitive, where a user does not use the interface routinely, even a simple interface can be intimidating to use and therefore operate as a deterrent to greater use.
As another instance, while known systems enable a conferee (e.g., an initiator) to queue files for sharing during a session, known systems do not provide a universal session queue to receive all conferee files prior to and/or during a session. For instance, in a conference including eight conferees where an initiator intends to share seven files and each of the other seven conferees intends to share two files each for a total of 21 files, there is no queue for receiving all of the files. No universal session queue means conferees often cannot form an understanding of the volume of content to be shared during a session or intentions of other conferees to share files. In these cases, often times session periods end prior to conferees sharing files or valuable session time is wasted with conferees verbally bantering back and forth about intention to share files during the session.
In addition, because files are not queued in a universal queue, there is no ability for conferees to access or control other conferee files unless those files are shared by the conferee that provided the files. For instance, where a session initiator has earmarked seven files to be shared during a session, other conferees can only see and interact with files currently shared by the initiator. For example, if the initiator shares a single word processor document with other conferees, a second conferee can only see and manipulate the shared document and has no ability to access or control the other six files earmarked by the initiator to be shared.
Another problem with known systems is that real time control of remote conferee display screens is often slow as updates between linked computers have to be sent in their entirety to each computer linked to a session. Often times there is at least some latency between when actions occur on a local screen and when actions are replicated on remote screens given network capabilities, noise, etc. Any latency in content delivery is bothersome and can hamper the natural flow of information between disparately located conferees.
One other problem with known conferencing systems is that known systems often are tied to specific hardware or, more specifically, to specific display screens for sharing content. For instance, many conference spaces have dedicated display screens that are mounted within or otherwise substantially permanently secured within a conference space and that are linked to hardware switching devices for receiving content from sources. In other cases screens may be mounted to carts for movement to different locations within a larger conferencing area but the screens are still dedicated to the larger conferencing system. In many cases large flat panel display screens exist that are primarily provided for some non-conferencing purpose such as to show a video or to display a television show (e.g., CNN news network). Despite many available large display screens at many locations, those screens are typically not useable for conferencing purposes. Inability to use available large displays for conferencing purposes is especially troublesome in cases where a remote conferee is required to use a device including a small display (e.g., a smart phone or tablet type device) during a conference despite an available larger screen display in the conferee's vicinity.
Yet another problem with existing conferencing systems is that known systems only allow most conferees to use a single display screen during a session despite the fact that the information to be shared among disparately located conferees often is more than can optimally be presented on a single display screen. For instance, while there are conference spaces that have been specifically set up to use two, three or more common large display screens within a single conference space to share content among conferees within the space, in most cases remote conferees patching into these systems to participate in conference activities only have a single desktop computer screen, a laptop screen, a tablet screen, etc. Viewing content from a large display screen on a smaller screen is difficult for many conferees. Where content is shared on several large display screens in a local conference space, viewing all of that content on a smaller screen is almost impossible. Here, one option is for a remote conferee to view content from only one large screen at a time and to flip through the large screen content but that solution means that the conferee cannot see all of the content at the same time.
Years ago, most companies were regional or, where they were national, had one or more offices in each region of the country to service relatively local clients. Employees lived near the facilities they worked in and often had dedicated offices adjacent other employees they routinely worked with and had access to local resources such as conference spaces, video communication systems, printers, etc. One advantage in these cases was that employees became familiar with all available resources within a facility through routine use. Each employee knew office layouts, locations of and affordances in conference spaces, and in many cases even knew general schedules of fellow employees in their facilities (e.g., that staffing meetings were held every Monday morning from 8 AM to 9 AM in conference room AAA).
Another advantage was that the employees could quickly determine availability of resources including conference spaces and other employees. An employee could see if a light or a computer was on in another employee's office and determine if the other employee was in a facility that day. An employee could visually determine if a conference space was available.
One other advantage was that teams of people that worked on specific projects were often located in the same facility. Co-location meant that team members were able to see each other routinely and to find other team members in between team conferences to move team tasks along. To this end, with employees co-located, short impromptu meetings when two employees had open space in their schedules could happen naturally. For instance, two employees could bump into each other in a hallway and have a short conference regarding a pressing issue. As another instance, one employee could pop her head into another employee's office and, if the other employee was available, could have a short discussion about some topic or could identify a time when the short discussion could occur.
Yet another advantage was that employee's could sense availability of other employees based on non-verbal tell tale signs. For instance, if a first employee had her door shut during morning hours, other employees could sense that the first employee was busy during that time even though the first employee's schedule may have indicated availability. As another instance, based on personal conversations, employees in one facility may have known well in advance when a first employee from that facility was going to be traveling to a different facility in a different time zone and therefore that the first employee would likely be out of pocket during certain periods of the day due to the time change.
Times have changed and so have the staffing models at many large companies so that now many employees routinely travel among many different facilities nationally and internationally to attend meetings and conferences. Many employees are routinely located in unfamiliar facilities without knowledge about facility layout and affordances, locations of other employees within facilities, or any tools for assessing real time schedules of enterprise resources (e.g., conference or personal spaces, affordances within spaces, other employees, etc.). For example, an employee visiting a large Tokyo facility for the first time would be unfamiliar with locations of conference spaces within the facility as well as options for space that could be used for personal focused work as well as affordances (e.g., video capabilities, printers, etc.) within the spaces. Here, the employee also generally would not be aware of locations of personal offices of other employees within the space or of spaces temporarily (e.g., for a day) used by other specific employees within the space. Even if the employee had a map of different spaces within the facility, the employee would have no way to determine availability of the spaces for personal or group use or the locations of other employees in the facility located outside their assigned personal spaces.
Problems associated with lack of insight into resources and schedules are exacerbated by un-scheduled on the fly changes to resource schedules that are unknown to employees. For instance, a conference space may be claimed for an impromptu 25 minute meeting between two colleagues that unexpectedly bump into each other in a hall way. In this case, the conference space as well as each of the conferencing colleagues are out of pocket during the 25 minute meeting. As another instance, a conference scheduled for 60 minutes including 7 employees may be completed early after 25 minutes so that the space used for the conference as well as the 7 employees are freed up earlier than expected. Here, even if a first employee had access to an electronically maintained schedule of another employee in a conference, the unexpected schedule change would not be detected and an opportunity to communicate or inability to communicate as a function of a schedule change would not be perceived by the first employee.
To support a fluid set of employees within enterprise facilities, enterprises are routinely seeking to provide space optimized for specific uses. For instance, where employees within a facility or a section of a facility routinely engage in focused individual activities, space should be optimized for individual activities and in another section of a facility where employees routinely work in large groups (e.g., 5 or more employees), the space should be optimized to facilitate large group activities. Current systems for identifying optimized employee supporting resources are not very good.
Thus, there is a need for tools that enable employees of an enterprise to identify resources within one or more enterprise facilities as well as affordances associated with those resources and current and future availability of those resources.
There is also a need for employees to be able to set notifications for themselves or for other employees to indicate status changes (e.g., a change from available to busy or vice versa) for specific enterprise resources. There is further a need for a system that enables tracking of resource use in a simple and cost effective manner using hardware that already exists for other purposes, especially in facility areas where wireless access points or the like are not provided.